Skip to main content
idapt
HomeCodeAI ModelsPricing
Sign inStart free
  • Home
  • Pricing
  • AI Models
  • Image models
  • Voice models
  • Video models
  • Rankings
  • New models
  • Model status
  • Multi-Model Chat
  • Voice Mode
  • Voice HUD
  • Web Search
  • Image Generation
  • Video Generation
  • Audio Generation
  • Transcription
  • Drive
  • Credentials
  • Sharing
  • Workspaces
  • Tasks
  • Memory
  • Agents
  • Subagents
  • Automations
  • Skills
  • idapt Code
  • Code Execution
  • Computers
  • Computer Use
  • Computer Assist · Soon
  • Containers
  • Cloud Computers
  • Local AI
  • AI Gateway
  • API & SDK
  • CLI
  • MCP
  • Tunnels
  • All features →
  • LLM cost calculator
  • Token counter
  • Context window checker
  • Can I run it
  • Model picker quiz
  • Savings finder
  • Video cost estimator
  • Text to speech cost
  • Transcription cost
  • API endpoint tester
  • All free tools →
  • Blog
  • Use cases
  • Comparisons
  • Best of
  • Skills
  • Learn
  • Changelog
  • Help center
  • FAQ
  • Privacy
  • Compare all models
  • Support
  • idapt Code
  • Developers
  • Quickstarts
  • API reference
  • API pricing
  • CLI
  • MCP
  • Downloads
  • Desktop
  • Badges and embeds
© idapt[email protected]TermsPrivacy PolicyLegal noticeReport content
X (Twitter)
All skills
Productivity

Aggregate a hiring debrief

Four scorecards turned into one decision with the disagreement visible.

Fill it in

One per interviewer.

It is the most useful thing in the loop.

Only one of them is a signal.

Your prompt

Aggregate the debrief in .

Separate EVIDENCE from impression for every rating. "Strong on system design" is an
impression; "designed a workable sharding scheme and named the failure mode
unprompted" is evidence. A summary built on impressions ranks confidence.

Surface the DISAGREEMENT rather than averaging it. Two interviewers reaching
opposite conclusions on the same competency is the most informative thing in the
loop, and an average turns it into a mediocre score that nobody argues with.
Map each rating to the competency it was supposed to assess, and flag anything
nobody assessed.

Summarise without recommending. The decision belongs to the hiring manager, and a
summary that leads with a verdict changes how the evidence is read.
Continue and pick your folderOpens with everything above already filled in.

Why this works

Two interviewers reaching opposite conclusions on the same competency is the most informative thing in a loop, and averaging turns it into a mediocre score nobody argues with. This surfaces the disagreement and separates evidence from impression.

More productivity skills

  • Document to slides
  • Meeting notes

Use it now in a chat in 1 click

Use Aggregate a hiring debrief
Turn this into tasks
  • Weekly review
  • Decision brief
  • Build an investor deck